Dan Hodges And A Lack Of Evidence

One problem that faces those who scrabble around the dunghill that is Grubstreet is ensuring that, behind every one of those attention-grabbing headlines, every social media boast, is sufficient evidence to stand those claims up. It is an issue that the Mail on Sunday’s not at all celebrated blues artiste Whinging Dan Hodges has failed to address - more than once.

He's desperate, Dan

Desperate Dan was for some time merely an opinion writer, and only for the MoS, but has more recently branched out into pieces for the Daily Mail too. Perhaps, with all those redundancies coming down the line, he is having to prove his worth to his editor in chief, the legendarily foul mouthed Paul Dacre.

The Hodges problem was demonstrated superbly after the Mail pitched the misogynistic and, indeed, untrue and likely defamatory smear of Labour’s deputy leader Angela Rayner, claiming that she had done a “Basic Instinct” at now disgraced and former alleged Prime Minister Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson to put him off his stride at PMQs, which she did not.

As those working in the service of the perpetually thirsty Paul Staines at the Guido Fawkes blog noted, “The oddest thing about this row is that from Boris’s vantage point, and with Rayner sat behind her despatch box, the line of sight for Boris means it is almost certain that he was unable to see Angela’s legs”. Yet Hodges claimed to have “sources” and the “truth”.

Now has come the move by Labour leader Keir Starmer to appoint senior Civil Servant Sue Gray as his chief of staff. At least Hodges is not, this time, among those attempting to invalidate her inquiry into Partygate: his line is to attack Starmer, something which will be taking up more of his time, and that of other Northcliffe House bunker inmates, as the General Election looms.

Headlined “This grubby Sue Gray recruitment annihilates all pretence that Sir Keir Starmer is a man of principles”, Hodges rather let himself go when advertising the piece on Twitter. “Sue Gray attempted to block government over Trans-policy veto. Intervention came at time when she was believed to be negotiating with Keir Starmer to join his team”. Cue the article.

“Just before Christmas, Ministers took the fateful - and controversial - decision to block Scotland’s new Gender Recognition Bill … On December 22, Sue Gray, Second Permanent Secretary to the Cabinet Office, sent an email to those discussing the legislation … ‘I found reference to S35 [the section of the Scotland Act that allows the Scottish Secretary to exercise a veto] difficult,’ she wrote, ‘but I found even more difficult the words about stopping the Bill. But as you say, this seems to have been agreed.’”

Why's my f***ing photo here again, c***?!?!?

What was that, again? “THIS SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN AGREED”. Moreover, the approach from Starmer and his team is believed to have come as recently as last month. Hello Dan Hodges. But it isn’t the only problem with this article: he then infers that she, and Labour, are jumping the gun on her move.

“A key part of Gray’s defence is that her appointment will be fully scrutinised by the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments (ACOBA). But again, the regulations are crystal clear. The Business Appointment Rules for Crown Servants state that people leaving the Civil Service ‘should not accept or announce a new appointment or offer of employment before it has been approved’” he notes. Then comes the lack of evidence.

“But last Thursday, a Labour spokesman confirmed: ‘The Labour Party has offered Sue Gray the role of chief of staff to the Leader of the Opposition. We understand she hopes to accept the role subject to the normal procedures.’” SUBJECT TO NORMAL PROCEDURES. Like that approval. But do go on.

“Labour and Gray are self-evidently flouting these procedures. And going to increasingly desperate lengths to cover up that fact”. Bullshit. And he then doubles down: "The only logical rationale for the move is that Starmer - and Gray - want the flexibility of operating in a more overtly political way”.

Now he’s just guessing. But revealing interesting details on how the Mail titles intend to go after Starmer and his party. And go after him they will: remember, these are the papers that refused to endorse Tony Blair’s New Labour, telling voters to “hold their noses” and keep on voting Tory. The problem for the Mail and Hodges is that this kind of drivel will not seriously detain swing voters.

Because it’s just more desperate barrel scraping. But you knew that anyway.

Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by becoming a Patron on Patreon at

https://www.patreon.com/Timfenton